About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
? >> the special representative for afghanistan and pakistan leads our overall policy efforts ande are supporting his efforts, ambassador grossman's efforts, to develop all of the different elements of our policies. >> tried to get him here but couldn't. >> okay. so, in other words, you aren't in a position really to answer my question? is that what you're saying? >> yes, senator. i would defer to the special representatives office. >> then would you since the question is to you would you get me a written answer to the question? >> i will, sir. >> thank you. mr. harrigan, what are dea's plans for continued operations should military forces draw down to levels that would not allow adequate support for your operations? >> well, again, co-chairman grassley, i have been in discussions really for the last 18 months with my counter part at the podium here, mr. wechsler, as well as our regional director in afghanistan with the u.s. military and si isaf forces. dea has no intention of drawing down any of our 81 personnel. it would be a bit premature to see right now how the drawdown will impact dea but l
. the fact is we went into a country to fight al qaeda who was all in the mountains in pakistan and even in the cities in pakistan, probably with the knowledge of the pakistani government. and we've wasted a lot of money and lives in an area where we didn't need to be, because that war will continue. there are only 100 al qaeda give or take left in afghanistan. but there are al qaeda in other spots in the middle east. and al qaeda's people have plotted terrorist activities from germany and from other places in europe. they don't need osama bin laden's base to have activity. there's nothing you need -- as far as the soviet union, the soviet union went down for goodly reasons, because of all the money they spent in afghanistan. true, we were there fighting them, but their attempt at gaining empire, which has been the loss of many empires, stretching too far and going beyond their supply lines, killed them. they spent money there and they'd like us to stay there. they're being real nice to us. they're helping us with bases, to bring in armaments and troops and supplies. come on, america. sp
against al qaeda and associated groups outside of afghanistan, pakistan and iraq. director leon panetta expressed concerns on the shifting to other places most notably in yemen, somalia, north africa, and i hope he will address what you see as the appropriate role for the special operation forces in those aeas. in announcing lieutenant general allan's nomination, president obama called him, quote, the flight commander to take over the vital mission in afghanistan. if confirmed, the general will have big boots to fill and succeeding general petraeus commander of the 49 member international security assistance force coalition and u.s. forces aghanistan. like general petraeus, general allen brings an in-depth understanding of the complexities of the counterinsurgency effort based on his own experience as the coander in anbar province in iraq. working with the sunni awakening the marines andanbar succeeded in getting local sunni tribal leaders to reject the insurgency and instead support the iraqi government and its the deputy commander at u.s. central command general ellen has developed a
on counterterrorism efforts with pakistan, setting up officer training academies for afghan police and security operations in the region. this is an hour. >> prime minister. >> thank you, mr. speaker. with the mission i'd like to make a statement on afghanistan. from the outset this government has sought to take a more hard-headed, more security-based approach to our mission. as i said, we're not there to build a perfect democracy. still less a model society. yes, we will help with the establishment of democratic institutions. yes, we can improve infrastructure, develop education, encourage development. but we are in afghanistan for one overriding reason, to ensure our own national security by helping the afghans to take control of theirs. this means building up the afghan security forces so we can drawdown british combat forces with the afghans themselves able to prevent al qaeda from returning and posing a threat to us and our allies around the world. this is particularly poignant today, i believe, mr. speaker, on the eve of the sixth anniversary of 7/7, an attack that was executed by extremi
, in pakistan rather. >> today we honor a singular act of gallantry. as we near the 10th anniversary of the attacks thrust our nation into war, it is the occasion to pay tribute to a soldier and a generation that has borne the burden of our security during a hard decade of sacrifice. i want to take you back to the circumstances that led to this day. it is may 26, 2008. in the remote eastern afghanistan, near the mountainous border of pakistan. helicopters carrying dozens of a lead army rangers race over the rugged landscape. and their target is an insurgent, down. the mission is high risk. it is broad daylight. the insurgents are heavily armed. but it is considered a risk worth taking because intelligence indicates that a top al qaeda commander is in that compound. soon the helicopters touched down, and our rangers immediately come under fire. within minutes, leroy -- then a staff sergeant -- and another soldier are pushing ahead into a courtyard surrounded by high mud walls. that is when the enemy opens up with their a k-47's. leroy is hit in both legs. he's bleeding badly. but he s
a pakistan on this particular trip. did he talk about what pakistan was not on his itinerary? guest: he did not talk about that specifically. it was very focused on afghanistan, but also on the border between afghanistan and pakistan. he did not say specifically why he did not go. i think it is pretty clear for a couple of reasons. the u.s. is trying to gauge just how much cooperation they can get from pakistan going forward. pakistan has a lot of u.s. trainers that have been working intensely with their special forces, and as a result of that, withheld some of the decade that went with them. they also repelled some of the partnership on the war on terrorism, so to speak. they are still trying to gauge that. for now, in the past, the key relationship between the u.s. and pakistan and the military have been between admiral mullen and his pakistan counterpart, the army chief of staff. i think that this point, the u.s. is still trying to weigh what they can do to move this cooperation forward with pakistan. host: the defense policy reporter a bloomberg news, thank you for being on the "washing
on the border of pakistan and afghanistan. perhaps it's time to shut down $17 billion worth of money going for reconstruction projects when our track record really stinks when it comes to reconstruction projects. now, i hope that you all are going to convince me i've become cynical and angry and frustrated about the way we're spending money in theater and i want to tell you i'm looking for good news. i hope we hear some today. but i think it is really time for a gut check. because i've got too many people in missouri saying, why can't we fix this road? then i look at the projects that we're building in afghanistan and it's hard to explain to them why we can't fix that road because we can't afford it, but yet we can throw money away in afghanistan on projects that are clearly not sustainable and if anybody would have spent time thinking about it in the first place, they would have realized that. that kind of planning has to begin happening and that kind of accountability has to be present. i'm pleased we have a number of witnesses today that are going to testify to contracting in theaters a
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7